I am frequently contacted by string players needing help with tonal issues in their search for an instrument. Many string players have trouble sorting out what tonal criteria are important in the process of selecting an instrument. Problems arise most often when string players attempt to objectify issues of tone. A player’s interface with an instrument is largely a subjective matter, and as such it is best dealt with using subjective criteria.

One client wrote:

I like a wide, sweet sound which also cuts through. It seems that fast notes sound clearer on some violins, while they sound fuzzy on others. If that is dependent on the violin, then I obviously would prefer a violin that easily sounds clear. My testing procedure so far has involved this:

Playing a high F sharp and surrounding notes at different dynamics. All notes should sound powerful and even.

Playing fast scales in first position, checking for fuzziness in between the notes.

First few notes of the second movement of Brahms’ third sonata. It should feel and sound very wide, fat, settled, comfortable.

Loud heavy notes at the frog and across the range of the G string. The violin should sound loud and even a bit edgy, not ‘crushed.’

This client has missed the boat. Violins, like people, each have unique attributes and drawbacks that must be factored into the development of a relationship with the instrument. As an analogy consider that some people go about the process of identifying a romantic match by subjecting every potential mate to a rigid and extensive set of criteria. Any potential mate is cast aside who does not conform. Usually this strict culling process results in a sample of zero. When considering people who sift the sample of potential mates in this way, but complain about a lack of success with the search, one wonders if they really want to find a realistic match, or are actually just not quite ready to settle down. If they do happen to find someone that strictly meets all of the criteria, there may be no chemistry between them after all, and in any case they will have missed the chance to learn about themselves from having had to adapt to another.

Similarly, musicians operating this way in the selection of a string instrument, could easily be missing the opportunity to learn about their own playing, through learning how to extract the best out of any instrument, and to adapt to many different instruments. A more subjective and adaptive approach to a search will often actually cause players to modify their criteria and substantially improve their playing.

Specifically, I recommend that players abandon any so-called “objective” testing procedure altogether, in favor of the method detailed below, which I developed for myself, based on my years of experience playing on many different instruments:

With each new instrument just practice as you normally would, exploring what changes you must make in your playing to find your voice on the instrument. In effect see how quickly you can FORGET what you are playing on and feel comfortable in the playing itself.

Don’t look to isolate problems with the instrument; rather, try to find what works well for you with the instrument and what gives you trouble. After a while you will have a sense of the balance between attributes and drawbacks with the instrument as you relate to it. Over time you should be able to intuitively adapt to the instrument. If, after a couple of hours of scales and normal practice you are frustrated, the violin may be in poor adjustment (a frequent problem), or the violin may simply not be for you.

If you try violins in this manner from a major shop where most things are set up well, and the available inventory is excellent and plentiful, and you come up with no instruments that you can feel comfortable playing on, you should work on your ability to adapt to different instruments before setting out to find a violin to purchase.

Once an instrument has passed the personal test and you have become nominally comfortable with your own voice on it, the most important part of the process can start. Play in ensemble with people to see how it feels to actually make music with others while playing on the instrument.

Play in the settings for which you will actually use the instrument. If you are not a touring soloist, you don’t need to have a violin that will project well for the Brahms Concerto. If you mostly play in orchestra, definitely try the violin in orchestra to be sure that you are comfortable and can hear yourself and your colleagues when playing in this setting. For me the sonata and chamber music test is the most important one as I normally play in these settings. I want to feel good touching my colleagues’ sounds with my sound, on whatever instrument I am playing.

Avoid taking too much advice from others about how you sound on an instrument. Do not be too comfortable with anyone deciding for you what your voice should sound like. The main things you need to know about the tone of an instrument are:

Do you feel comfortable in your voice and able to sing on the instrument?

Can you be heard by others to the extent you need to be in the contexts in which you will use the instrument?

All other issues or concerns are irrelevant to the process of establishing your tonal connection with an instrument and dialogue around such issues is to be avoided.

Note: This summer [2002] the Jupiter Trio spent three days at Skywalker Ranch in order to make a recording using the state-of-the-art equipment available there. What follows is a personal account of this experience written by pianist Aglika Angelova to family, friends, and supporters of the trio.

Dear Ones,

i have written this email so many times in my head…and i cannot postpone sending it any more – i know that you want to know everything about the recording JUPITER TRIO did 10 days ago. it seems like a long time ago…may be i am trying to forget about it for a moment, although there are many haunting memories.

i guess the interesting stuff wouldn’t be the fact that our stand-by piano tuner talked on the phone THE WHOLE TIME he wasn’t tuning. or that adam, our engineer/producer was telling us curious stories from other recordings with ‘big’ guys that he has done.

the stunning thing for me is that: what a fascinating drive for perfection we all have! and how far we go to pursue it. how many takes all together? i think we had 6 reels with about 60 takes average on each one. you go to a concert and hear a piece once. then you go home and you probably hum it, or wake up to it, or you remember listening to it at the concert. you don’t hear the same passage 20 times. i NEVER play the same passage 20 times in a row with CONCERT ENERGY! this is what we did there. again. again. again. we kept working. average of 11-12 hours with 2 meal breaks. we would record; and then go to the boot and listen and curse, or smile, agree and disagree. and then play again.

adam kept the atmosphere light and we felt that all we needed to do is play our best. all the time. he was keeping track of the time, of the wholeness of the movements, of everything else. what a relief!…”julian, play that passage again please. don’t think. just play….yes, and now one more time please…oh, this was great, unfortunately a fly hit the mike right at that moment – we cannot use this take…something is squeeching – is it your pin piece julian?…oh, it is the piano bench, we must change it…”
third movement beethoven was the most challenging – thank God we started with it. shosti got to another level as well – adam is a great musician (plays violin in st. luke`s orchestra in nyc) and we definitely used him as a coach as well as a producer. he had promised me that he will make us work harder than we had ever worked in our lives. that was on the phone 2 days before the session started. i was excited – someone making me work MORE than i already do??? I WANTED IT! BADLY! (secretly it was hard to believe that it was possible, yet the feeling of what it might be was exhilarating!). toward the end of the 3d day he said: “you guys are making me tired. you have a great stamina as a group.”

there was so much energy in the studio, apart from the cliff bars and odwalla juice that we had brought for ourselves…it was at times overwhelming. the piano was like a perfect lover to me, the mikes felt like they wanted to extract the best out of us. we needed to play much stronger and energetic and much softer than we had ever done in concert. when you put on the cd THERE IS ONLY THE MUSIC. there is no leopard print hair or expressive faces and body language to add to your experience as a listener. on the cd YOU GET THE PURE MUSIC. i have to admit that like it. i didn’t think i would. we created a great experience for ourselves, went in prepared and learned a tremendous amount.
it didn’t matter that my day before we went in on the first day was crummy. i was annoyed at the world BEFORE we even played a note. it all transformed. we were it. for 3 entire days.

now is the waiting. getting distance from it all. adam will do the edits and send it to us to listen. then he will master it (didn’t we already???). we are working on the c d jacket and discussing our next program. the tour in japan is happening in may 2004! 13 concerts in one month.

it is great to finally be home. rethink and reflect. and write this e-mail as a thank you for all your support and love!

Intonation is a vexing problem for string players. In fact it is so much so that often one of the distinctions between the most sought-after string performers and ensembles from their professional colleagues less in demand is the quality and consistency of their intonation. The notion of “in tune” as a goal, however laudable, is simplistic. In order to achieve satisfying and consistent-sounding intonation, it is critical to have a concept for tuning, based on certain acoustical realities, and based on the context in which you are working.

Any discussion of intonation in the modern era begins with an understanding of the system of equal temperament. With equal temperament, by adjusting every interval to the same degree in the scale, two problems of tuning chords are dealt with via compromise: octave displacement, and the effect of the qualities of different intervals of the triad in different keys. In the equal-tempered system, music sounds relatively in tune (or out of tune) to the same degree in every key. A keyboard tuned to equal temperament frees a composer to write pieces containing any and every possible modulation. Because of this advantage, equal temperament has become the most universally used tuning system for keyboard instruments. J. S. Bach was one of the first musicians and composers to fully exploit the virtues of the system of equal temperament. The great keyboard sonatas of the classical and romantic eras, and most of the repertoire written in the years since would have been impossible without the equal-tempered system. In the modern era, the equal tempered system also provides a convenient base line for tuning all non-keyboard instruments in a manner that requires no specific knowledge of the harmonic context of a situation. Modern orchestras typically conceive of tuning in equal temperament. Electronic tuning machines generally use equal temperament as their default setting partly for this reason.

However practical it may be as a compromise, for non-fixed-pitch instruments, equal temperament is not a means to the most beautiful or satisfying intonation in either harmonic or melodic contexts. There are situations where equal temperament makes sense for non-fixed-pitch instruments. In the modern orchestra, for instance, any large deviance from equal temperament can leave a player sounding less unified with the group. There are situations in chamber music settings as well, where equal temperament is the most exigent solution to a conflict of acoustical and technical realities.

In certain repertoire, even with fixed-pitch (keyboard and fretted) instruments, there are tuning choices to consider besides equal temperament, depending on the degree to which a piece modulates, and depending on the actual keys to which the piece modulates. Early music practitioners, especially keyboard players, must incorporate an understanding of temperament as essential among the tools they bring to the problems of performance. There are thousands of possible temperaments for tuning, and at various points in history, prior to the widespread adoption of equal temperament as a universal tuning system, various temperaments have informed composers and vice-versa.

The best non fixed-pitch instrumental performers invariably employ intonation based on the harmonic, melodic, and instrumental contexts in which they are playing, even if they don’t always know they are doing so. When playing with piano, string players are most often relegated to a modified version of equal temperament. In some instances we can cheat and deviate from the temperament of the piano, but many times such deviance will leave a string player sounding out of tune with the piano. Other than the instrumental context of playing with piano, there are two other common contexts that present tuning problems: octave displacement and harmonic-versus-melodic. String players need to consider these problems, both intellectually and intuitively in order to develop satisfying and consistent style of intonation.

To understand octave displacement one need only experiment at the keyboard. In the upper-most octave of the piano, sound one single note. Then play the same pitch in the lowest octave. If the piano is well in tune, the notes will sound too close together when played separately, and too far apart when played together. In other words, when played separately the upper note sounds sharp and the lower note flat. When played together just the opposite is true. This is because of the inherent conflict between the overtone series that the true notes produce. In order to achieve consonance between the overtone series in the two notes, they must be pulled together. But the point at which the overtone series line up leaves the notes sounding hopelessly out of tune in any melodic context. The farther apart the octaves are, the more acute the problem. This is the reason why chords built on a wide tessitura are particularly problematic to tune. Equal temperament is a compromise system that theoretically, leaves both pitches acceptably in (or out of) tune for either context.

To understand harmonic and melodic context as it relates to tuning, one can experiment with any string instrument. Cello reveals the issues most acutely because the relationship of intervals in the lower range is broader and the pitch issues are more clearly audible. If you play an F natural on the D string of the cello against the open A string, your ear will naturally perceive the basis of an F major triad. This will cause you to place the F on the high side, in order to leave the third of the chord, in this case the open A string, sounding sweet and low, where the overtone series line up and “ring” in a major chord. That same F rendered against the open G string and perceived as a seventh in a G 7 chord will sound hopelessly sharp. A lower placement of the F will be necessary to arrive at a lined up set of overtones in this context, and achieve the ringing sound of the lowered seventh in the G 7 Chord. The same F, as the third degree in a melodic passage in D flat major, will once again sound sweeter on the high side, as long as it doesn’t have to resonate against the D-flat major triad in the same register. The reality that the third degree of the scale sounds more satisfying higher in a melodic context, and sweeter lower in a harmonic context is a problem with which all non fixed-pitch instrumentalists must contend.

Arguably, intonation in a string quartet raises some of the most problematic tuning issues in music. Modern instrumental training generally doesn’t stress an understanding of temperament, octave displacement, and harmonic and melodic contexts for tuning. This deficiency in training leaves many string players ill equipped for sorting out the issues of tuning in a string quartet. The nature of the repertoire, and the possibility of a totally blended sonority, along with the high standards continually being set by active rehearsing groups, all conspire to highlight intonation deficiencies for groups that fail to meet the highest standards. The attainment of a high standard for intonation in a string quartet is a labor intensive project. It requires that the members spend enough rehearsal time to become familiar with the harmonic role each line serves in a chord, and it demands that the members agree on a shared concept for intonation and pitch temperament in the group.

One example of a tuning problem from the string quartet repertoire is in the beginning of the second movement of Mozart’s Quartet, K. 465, marked Andante Cantabile. The movement is in F major. The opening melodic note in the first violin part is a C natural, one octave above middle C. The second violin plays an A that corresponds with the open A string. If either violinist tunes their note to their open A string, the first violin will be tempted to push the C natural high, in an attempt to achieve a ringing chord with a sweet and low third, in this case A natural. This will ultimately push the whole group sharp to their open strings and the group will lose the sympathetic ring of the open strings. The resulting blended quartet sound will have a deadened quality similar to what one experiences in keys with many flats such as D flat major. In practice there are several possible compromises that will yield a more satisfying result: In one system, both of the violinists must adjust slightly low to their sympathetic open A and E strings in the opening chord, depending upon what the group can agree sounds best. With the first violin adjusting downward slightly, the C natural will sound just a bit low to both the open E and open A strings. The second violin will also compromise, with a note that is neither as low as a “beatless” third, nor as high as the open A string. This type of adjusted temperament is just one example of the complexity involved in bringing a satisfying of intonation to a string quartet. Frequently the quickest path to resolving intonation conflicts in string quartet work is to adopt equal temperament as the goal when such problems arise.

With regard to octave displacement in a string quartet, it is necessary for the group to be mindful of the problem when tuning their individual instruments, as well as when tuning chords. Generally, the outer extremes of range need to be brought together, as in the earlier example of the piano. This will avoid one or the other end of the group having to make an extreme and odd sounding adjustment in a particularly widely spaced chord. I recommend that a group tune as follows:

First the cello should find an A that the group can all agree on. The cello should then tune the tightest possible fifths that still ring. By the time the C is tuned it should be relatively high, possibly even as measured against equal temperament.

The remaining instruments should line up their A string with the cello one at a time (using open strings, not harmonics) and then proceed to tune the tightest possible fifths.

Then the players should each check their G strings (the viola should check the C as well) against the cello’s C string and against the cello’s D string. Some adjustment of the upper players’ G strings is likely to be necessary in order to have all of the fifths line up.

By starting from the same tight temperament in the open fifths the group has the best possible chance to sound ringing and in tune in a wide range of contexts.

I’ve been given thousands of “A’s” in my career as a professional cellist. I’ve gotten them from oboists, pianists, violinists, electronic machines and assorted other sources, and as I have responded to these many “A’s” and listened to others respond, I have come to realize that the “A” that is given is not necessarily, or even often, the one that is taken!

As a chamber musician, private cello teacher and competition judge, I do what I can, in written and oral comments, to raise the awareness amongst young musicians and colleagues of the importance of truly taking the “A” being given.

It is all too common, for example, to ask for an “A” from the piano, to start tuning after giving brief attention to whether there is some similarity between the two “A’s,” and then to proceed on to tuning the other strings (another subject in itself). Another frequent occurrence in a chamber group is for the pianist to give the “A” and for everyone to then tune at once! Imagine the result!

One extremely uninformed approach was exemplified by a student performance of a piano quartet: The pianist gave the “A,” which was taken by the cellist, who tuned not his open “A,” but his harmonics only. He then passed on to each subsequent string player his partial “A” harmonic. I gathered that he chose to do this, thinking that this harmonic was closer in range to the violins’ and viola’s open “A.” But the cellist failed to take into account the fact that harmonics are always more or less flat to the real pitch of the strings. The result was that the entire group was clearly flat to the piano for the entire performance, with the cello being flat to the piano, and the remaining instruments flat to the cello.

It has become more and more prevalent in recent years for musicians such as Ann-Sophie Mutter, the Julliard and Vermeer Quartets, and many others, to tune off-stage just before a performance. This provides necessary quiet, plenty of time, and the privacy to focus completely on the task. Also, many groups that I have observed and performed with will tune off-stage and again on stage to check that we are still, in fact, matched with the piano.

So, here you are, beginning a rehearsal with your pianist. You ask for an “A.” After giving it, the pianist usually retreats into his or her own thoughts, not paying any mind to whether or not you have actually tuned to his “A.” Had he listened, he would more likely than not have heard that you were flat! The reason is that the overtones of one note are just not complex enough to communicate a high enough pitch with one note played a single time. However it is far more likely that the “A” will be heard, and tuned to more accurately, if a chord is played by the piano, all notes struck at once. As matter of fact, for the same reason that a d minor or D major chord with the “A” on top is more likely to be heard and tuned to more accurately than a single note, a more complex chord, a G9 for example, will result in an even better matching to the piano’s “A” on the part of any string player. The G9 chord is particularly useful as it provides “harmonic neutrality” in the tuning process. As an example consider that tuning your “A” to an F major chord in the piano is likely to produce a flat result from the “A” as the third of the chord. The G9 chord however carries no such implication for the “A” as the 7th measured against the moderating influence of the 9th.

The involvement of the pianist in this process is, I feel, crucial to the best possible result: two pairs of ears are better than one. If you as pianist hear that your colleague has not taken or heard your “A” or your chord, do give it again. Continue to give it until you think the “A’s” are as well matched as they can be.

Moving on to tuning within a larger chamber group, we will designate the string player taking the “A” from the piano to be the cellist in the group, as again it is more likely that violinists and violists will hear accurately the open “A” of the cello than vice versa. (Lower strings will again tune flat to the open “A” of the violin for the same reasons as stated above—the complexity of the overtones.) I say the open “A” because as we know, the first partial harmonic is flatter than the open string and you would be handing out a flat “A” to the remainder of your group. I am not saying that once you have your “A” string tuned you cannot tune the rest of your own strings to your “A” string using harmonics. In fact you can, and it is a very good and reliable way to do so. Again, you as cellist will assume the role the pianist took in the earlier example, listening intently to the “A” your colleagues take, and you will not cease playing your “A” until you hear that the two match to your satisfaction, and so on down the line of all additional musicians in your group.

The increased likelihood of much improved intonation within your rehearsals and performances following the above process will be so rewarding as to be worth the additional time involved in taking care to begin on an equal “playing” field.

Oscar Shumsky was a musician’s violinist as much as he was a violinist’s violinist. Although his career never achieved the star status enjoyed by some of the more aggressively marketed artists of his generation, Shumsky was revered by professional musicians as well as by the concert public that did have the chance to hear him. Oscar Shumsky was likewise revered by his students, and by anyone who had the chance to hear him in a casual setting.

Vestige Classics, the label organized by Shumsky’s son Eric, himself a well-regarded violist, last year released a CD which bears testament to the elder Shumsky’s gifts. Oscar Shumsky: A Life Portrait is a compendium of live recordings never before released, chronologically covering most of the violinist’s career. The CD opens with eloquent introductory notes narrated by Eric Shumsky. The first selection is an astonishing reading of the first movement of the Beethoven Concerto with the Curtis Orchestra and Fritz Reiner recorded in 1938. This example of Oscar Shumsky playing the deepest of masterworks at 21 years old is astonishing in it’s vibrancy, excitement, beauty, and violinistic brilliance. The playing is so thrillingly in command, so tremendously deep interpretively, and so full of successfully navigated performance risk, that the listener can be completely transported by the performance, despite substantial flaws in the fidelity. The Viotti Concerto No. 22, recorded in 1948 with pianist William Sokolov is textbook brilliant violin playing and an example of Shumsky’s uncanny ability to take a rather stock, if beautifully crafted piece of the repertoire, and turn it into a spellbinding performance. An excerpt from Swan Lake, the famous Act 2 Pas d’action recorded around 1955 is absolutely heart wrenching. The Bach Chaconne recorded in 1967 is also wonderful, both violinistically and stylistically. Shumsky’s playing in Bach is robust, romantic and tasteful at all times even if puritans among us would classify the approach as uninformed as to period style. But violin mavens usually steer clear of this debate. Shumsky’s Bach represents an equally satisfying alternative to the urbane romanticism of the Milstein approach, which many consider the standard in Bach played on modern violin. The CD is rounded out with two more excellent recordings: Mozart B Flat Duo recorded in 1983 with Eric Shumsky, and the Dhonanyi Ruralia Hungarica Opus 32 C, recorded in 1993 with Seymour Lipkin on piano.

Oscar Shumsky: A Life Portrait is notable for both it’s high points and for the overall consistent quality of the playing and music-making. The one criticism which one could make (and for which the liner notes apologize) is the low fidelity of many of the recordings. There is surface noise present in many recordings, especially the Beethoven Concerto, and the Tchaikovsky is not quite at pitch, making it difficult for those with perfect pitch to listen with comfort. But these are small criticisms in the context of a CD which violin fans are lucky to have.

The overall impression that emerges after listening to this CD is that of an artist possessed of unflagging violinistic and musical integrity, as well as inspiration. This is truly great artist who never sold out to the violin or the music business. In short, Oscar Shumsky was a model violinist and musician. Through these and other recordings future generations of players will have the opportunity to emulate Oscar Shumsky’s mastery and integrity. Thank you Eric Shumsky for giving the world the opportunity to hear more of this amazing artistry!